We need to talk about Donald – the Nightmare continues

[Forty Two]

How is it physically possible for the Russians (or any other country) to 'attack', 'interfere', 'hack' the American voting process?

It's a sleight of hand in the reporting. Part of the Russian scheme in interfering with the election is alleged to include their traditional disinformation and propaganda projects. They also are big on blogs and social media, spreading their messages around. This is part of the "interference." So, when the news reports that Russia interfered with the election, people ought not assume that it means that there is proof that anything went on with respect to the actual voting. That's what some folks want the public to believe, but nobody has put forth any evidence of it.

Is it because ALL the voting machines are networked and connected to the internet so that any hacker can, with a bit of nous, hack into the system no matter how rigorous the protection?

All the voting machines are not networked. We have 50 states, each with its own election system and voting system. The State maintains a voter registration list, and you show up at the polls to vote. Most states use a rather manual system, involving filling in a little oval by hand on a paper ballot, which is then "machine read" by one of those stand-alone scanners. There isn't a way to hack those scanners unless one has physical access to the machine and can open it up and replace pieces of it or plug devices into it, and if there is any question, the paper ballots there are available to count by hand.

The notion of a hacked election, or that the Russians changed votes is absurd. The same people giving credence to that seem to be the same people who deny the possibility that ballot boxes are stuffed, dead people vote, and voters vote in multiple precincts, and that ineligible people sometimes vote.

[Brian Peacock]

It's almost as if US elections are completely without regulation or oversight.

[Forty Two]

Instead, the story is that the Russians are the problem for exposing how the Democrats were up to shady activities....

For the purposes of pushing the vote in a way that was more favourable to Russia.

LOL - so?

You really need to ask that? Seriously? An authoritarian regime trying to swing your election only generates a "so" out of you?

They've been "pushing the vote" for going on 100 years, dude. They push the vote with propaganda. They seek to get their message out, etc. A lot of those methods are not illegal. It's like the US going around and trying to spread pro-US and pro-capitalist propaganda in other countries.

Now, if there was a shred of evidence that they succeeded in doing something illegal or "hacking" something to change the result, then I would be deeply concerned. But, so far everything that gets reported is garbage - unnamed sources - hired gun IT guys saying that some entity "probably" was behind the DNC hacks because they use the same methods as every other hacker - memos about hookers and water sports -- I mean, I wouldn't begin to ever take this shit seriously regardless of who the President was.

One, there isn't any evidence that Russia actually did anything here,

Comey testified that it's almost a certainty that Russia did it.

Comey testified it's almost a certainty Russia did what, exactly?

How the fuck is a Republican Presidency more favorable to Russia anyway.

A Trump presidency is clearly more favourable to Russia. Not least because of a lifting of sanctions. And haven't you noticed how friendly Trump is being to fascists and/or dictators around the world (including Putin)?

What do you mean by friendly? What, specifically, has he done?

Now, as to sanctions, they have not been lifted, and won't be lifted until Crimea is returned: http://www.newsweek.com/american-sancti ... ays-588849 and https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... mp-ukraine

Up until this whole 2016 bullshit "Trump is in league with the Russians" the mantra for 30 fucking years was that the Republicans were too hard on the Russians, and that the Russians were not the bogeyman the Republicans always made them out to be. The Republicans were the ones saying the Russians were the enemy, and the Democrats were like, no way, reset, we can work with the Russians.

Don't be disingenuous. You are the first person to inform everyone that Trump isn't a mainstream Republican and that the Republican establishment hates him. Trump clearly doesn't represent Republicanism of the last 30 years.

Look - four years ago, Obama laughed at Mit Romney for calling Russia a great foreign policy threat - the 1980s called, and they want their foreign policy back. Hillary Clinton trying to do some sort of Russian reset in the US-Russian relationship during her stint at State, and she thought we could be close friends with Russia. And, there is nothing wrong with her wanting to do that. The bullshit starts when it is to her advantage to blame Russia and pin her opponent with "he's a russian stooge" label. It's so obvious that's what's happening.

And there is nothing about his policies to suggest he is any softer on Russia, except if you take public statements ingratiating himself to Putin by saying he admires the guy and thinks he's a strong leader. That kind of crap costs nothing, and if it gets the other side interested or amenable to talk, then it's worth it.

Compare this shit with the reporting of Obama's treatment of Iran - the Iran deal, and the handover of hundreds of billions of dollars, and the elimination of sanctions. Is Obama a stooge? Do you think Iran isn't up to shenanigans and trying to influence things over here? You think they don't have hackers on the payroll?

It's only that they needed some reason other than "someone leaked a bunch of material to wikileaks and it's true and it makes look like lying scumbags" - that they concocted this whole Russian crock-of-shit. It just strains credulity.

Yet multiple government bodies are conducting investigations into it. But sure, you know more than them. Black is white, after all.

I've read the reports, which if you did you'd see that they are smoke and mirrors. Nothing concrete. Everything is conclusions based on supposition.

The argument is that long before anyone actually thought Trump had a snowball's chance in hell of winning the Republican primary, Putin, in his prescience, saw the opportunity, and he got in league with Trump. Before Trump was even clinched as the nominee, they hacked the DNC and exposed some of the damning material, thinking it would help Trump, not other Republicans. Then they kept doing it, all while every major media outlet, every major pundit, and almost all the polling seemed to show that Trump had no way to win. MSNBC was mapping out that Trump, even on his best day, could not possibly win. But, the Russians knew that by just exposing these emails, they could swing the election....AND that it would be better to have the Republican Party - long the more staunch opponent of the Russians - than the Democrats in power, even though the Democrats have been traditionally much softer on foreign policy issues and much more pro Russia.

They could have easily had information on both sides and multiple candidates to cover different outcomes.

Who knows, right?

The apologetics from the right for the attack on your democratic election process by a foreign authoritarian regime is stunning.

What attack? When I see evidence of an "attack" I'll be outraged by it.

Bullshit. You don't even want an investigation. This is all about outrage for you and republicans, probably to help distract from the realisation in your heads that you backed an absolute moron for President.

Dude, there has been an investigation for about a year, maybe more. The heads of the intelligence agencies have testified that there is no evidence at all that the Trump campaign had anything to do with the Russians.

You have difficulty separating issues logically. So, you think the moronic nature of Trump has something to do with whether there is any evidence.

Exposing DNC emails and showing us, the voters, the true colors of the Democrat Party operatives is not an attack on the democratic process. The democratic process does not depend on the security of nefarious confidences.

So you're fine with foreign powers hacking your confidential systems and trying to install governments more to their liking? You don't really think that. You are just putting on an outrage show.

No, but it's like if someone robbed Nixon's private files, and we found out about Watergate that way. I would not condone robbery, but the robbery wouldn't make Nixon's actions good. Nixon should still be held accountable. It wouldn't be an injustice to Nixon.

And, I don't condone hacking, but in the reports that have been published, hacking is hardly mentioned, and nobody knows anything about it - who did what and when? Was it the Russians? It's all speculation.

I'm not outraged. I just cant believe how much garbage people are willing to swallow, just because it's about Trump. If this shit was about Obama, I guarantee you'd give it zero credence, as you should, like the birther nonsense.

Moreover, there is literally no evidence that has been made public to date that says the Russians did it. None. Zip. Zilch nada. And there is not a shred of evidence of any hacking having occurred, and nothing that impacted the ballot box.

You rebutted yourself. Thanks for not making me do it.

I haven't - we can't know things that aren't released to the public. Nobody has gone on record as saying they know the Russians did it. The most anyone has done is that the Russians probably did it because they have the motive and capability to do it. That doesn't mean they did it. It means they might have. But it also could be a leaker, and there's no reason to suppose it wasn't a leaker. It could be a domestic hacker. It could be an international hacking group that did it. Apparently, the Clintons and the DNC were pretty loose on IT security.

The "influence" that is being muddled with the lingo about hacks and leaks and whatnot, is the Russia Today news propaganda, and the Russian hiring of bloggers and such - all perfectly legal activities. The only influence that has been confirmed is influence that is allowed in a free country. Russia is allowed to publish propaganda, just like everyone else.

Who said they weren't?

Oh, lord. focus - the only influence that has been confirmed is the propaganda effort portion. That's what's muddled and where you let yourself get side tracked. Some official says "such and such agency says Russia was meddling in our election trying to give Trump the victory!" But, all that really means is that they were engaged in propaganda and other crap that happens all the time. It doesn't mean hacking or illegal activity. But, they put the vague references to hacking into the intelligence report, so it becomes part of -- muddled with -- the overall allegation that Russia - duh - has a longstanding practice of trying to muck about in other countries' affairs by publishing crap, propaganda, influence peddling and all that kind of stuff.

We KNOW that. But, the finer point of "did Russia hack the DNC and expose the DNC's illegal and unethical behavior?" - nobody knows, and there is no evidence of it. And, "did russia hack the election?" - the answer is "no." And, "was there any collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia?" The answer is no.

[Forty Two]

It's almost as if US elections are completely without regulation or oversight.

How do you figure? They are regulated and overseen. What doesn't the US do that would be normal or usual?

They must do plenty, because Democrats and their supporters say fraud in elections in the US is nonexistent. Isn't it? I mean, no significant fraud or nefarious doings occur in the US election system, does it? Or, does it. I forget what we're supposed to think now. Usually it's "no election fraud - everyone votes properly." Now, though, apparently, the system is so fucked up that it can't even be trusted, and it's owned by a foreign power.

[Brian Peacock]

The same people giving credence to that seem to be the same people who deny the possibility that ballot boxes are stuffed, dead people vote, and voters vote in multiple precincts, and that ineligible people sometimes vote.

So is electoral fraud a problem or not - or only a problem when one side get elected and the other side doesn't?

[Tero]

wonder if it lasted 15 minutes?
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 3919089664

[Tero]

https://twitter.com/jennerific713/statu ... 5250688007

[L'Emmerdeur]

The "Cabinet meeting" that was actually a demonstration of Trump's Cabinet grovelling and bootlicking while Il Douche sat and basked.

"Donald Trump just held the weirdest Cabinet meeting ever"

Once Trump finished touting his administration's accomplishments, he turned to several of his newly-minted Cabinet secretaries like Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue. Each of those Cabinet secretaries lavished praise on Trump, which he accepted without comment but with a broad smile.

At first, I thought Trump was just going to have the new members of the Cabinet spend a few minutes praising him. NOPE! It soon became clear that Trump planned to have every Cabinet member speak. And when I say "speak" what I really mean is "praise Trump for his accomplishments, his foresight, his just being awesome."

You think I am exaggerating. I am not. Here's what White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus said about Trump: "We thank you for the opportunity and blessing to serve your agenda."

[Tero]

Trump to fire Mueller because he was getting too close to...you know...Trump.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/report-tru ... ce=copyurl

[Brian Peacock]

I'd just like to say that I think Trump is doing an excellent job in difficult circumstances. For America to have such an intelligent, rational, humble, tolerant, unprepossessing, sanguine, deeply spiritual leader in these times of trouble, to have a leader with immense energy, foresight, passion, endurance, and potency, and an unflinching sense of duty and obligation, to have a leader who is not only respected by his people as he is by the peoples of the world, but who is truly admired and loved by all, by all without exception, a leader who brings light where there was darknes, hope where there was only despair, tolerance where their was hatred, harmony where there was discord, peace where there was violence, a leader who has come unto to us as both saviour and prophet, a leader who, by talent and force of will alone, coaxes the birds from the trees and the animals of the land unto his hand, who brings the planets into line, and who facilitates our great communion with the cosmos with ne'er a thought from himself, with ne'er a complaint but only a gentle smile and a warm embrace, is, not to put too fine a point on it, the only reason, and I mean the only reason, I haven't ended, by my own hand, the lives of my children and myself these past few months. He is my strength.

[Tero]

Very warm. Like coal.

[JimC]

I'd just like to say that I think Trump is doing an excellent job in difficult circumstances. For America to have such an intelligent, rational, humble, tolerant, unprepossessing, sanguine, deeply spiritual leader in these times of trouble, to have a leader with immense energy, foresight, passion, endurance, and potency, and an unflinching sense of duty and obligation, to have a leader who is not only respected by his people as he is by the peoples of the world, but who is truly admired and loved by all, by all without exception, a leader who brings light where there was darknes, hope where there was only despair, tolerance where their was hatred, harmony where there was discord, peace where there was violence, a leader who has come unto to us as both saviour and prophet, a leader who, by talent and force of will alone, coaxes the birds from the trees and the animals of the land unto his hand, who brings the planets into line, and who facilitates our great communion with cosmos with ne'er a thought from himself, with ne'er a complaint but only a gentle smile and a warm embrace, is, not to put too fine a point on it, the only reason, and I mean the only reason, I haven't ended, by my own hand, the lives of my children and myself these past few months. He is my strength.

There's a spot for you on Team Trump, as long as you can keep up the strength in your tongue...

[Brian Peacock]

Oh Lordy Lordy Jim! Do you really think so?

[JimC]

I was speaking tongue in cheek, so to speak...

[Feck]

He's not coming on a State visit to Britain, There might be demonstrations... apparently
He should come back to Scotland so we can glue his ass to an offshore wind turbine .